Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 20 Oct 2014, 10:41

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Expert Post
Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Status: Preparing for the another shot...!
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1425
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Followers: 128

Kudos [?]: 642 [0], given: 62

GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink] New post 21 Dec 2012, 03:02
Expert's post
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

85% (02:32) correct 15% (01:58) wrong based on 82 sessions
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the
comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those
fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied
spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur
after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many
astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.

Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer,
it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's
outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that
explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that
conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second
provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a
consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

Source: Jamboree

OA
[Reveal] Spoiler:
soon

_________________

Prepositional Phrases Clarified|Elimination of BEING| Absolute Phrases Clarified
Rules For Posting
www.Univ-Scholarships.com

1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 395
Location: India
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 192 [1] , given: 10

Re: Shoemaker Levi [#permalink] New post 22 Dec 2012, 07:32
1
This post received
KUDOS
Marcab wrote:
Hii Sri.
I will really appreciate if you explain the choice E. I reduced the options to A and E but thereafter I was confused. Moreover since you said that in A first boldface is not something which he is explaining, I could have also said that in E the first boldface is not a judgement.


To add to my explanation , a judgement is something which is subjective and is not objective. In this case since the support is based on what the astronomers think is correct and less on the actual facts, the support advanced is more a subjective one .
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna Test Prep
http://www.sravna.com

Classroom Courses in Chennai
Online and Correspondence Courses

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Apr 2013
Posts: 153
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 26 [1] , given: 36

Re: Shoemaker Levi [#permalink] New post 09 Jul 2013, 13:57
1
This post received
KUDOS
Marcab wrote:
Yeah, sorry for that.
Edited the post.
Infact I too have seen this question earlier, but the answer choices were different.


Marcab,

Below was my reason to eliminate A

"The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that
explanation" -- This statement describes the first bold faced correctly as a circumstance for which explanation is offered. However, second bold faced is not part of that explanation, which explains first bold faced. In fact this is the conclusion.
_________________

Maadhu

MGMAT1 - 540 ( Trying to improve )

Expert Post
MBA Section Director
User avatar
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 1742
Location: India
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 689

Kudos [?]: 3024 [0], given: 890

Re: Shoemaker Levi [#permalink] New post 21 Dec 2012, 04:25
Expert's post
Expert Post
Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Status: Preparing for the another shot...!
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1425
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Followers: 128

Kudos [?]: 642 [0], given: 62

GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Shoemaker Levi [#permalink] New post 21 Dec 2012, 06:06
Expert's post
Yeah, sorry for that.
Edited the post.
Infact I too have seen this question earlier, but the answer choices were different.
_________________

Prepositional Phrases Clarified|Elimination of BEING| Absolute Phrases Clarified
Rules For Posting
www.Univ-Scholarships.com

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 395
Location: India
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 192 [0], given: 10

Re: Shoemaker Levi [#permalink] New post 22 Dec 2012, 02:31
Marcab wrote:
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the
comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those
fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied
spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur
after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many
astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.

Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer,
it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's
outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that
explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that
conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second
provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a
consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

Source: Jamboree

OA
[Reveal] Spoiler:
soon


We can eliminate Choices B and C because the first boldface contains nothing that weighs against the conclusion of the argument. Choice D can be similarly eliminated because the second boldface says nothing against the conclusion but in fact is the conclusion. Choice A is a bit tricky. But if you look carefully look at the first boldface, it is not something which he is explaining. It is something he uses to explain something else which is the second boldface. So you are now left with Choice E which makes perfect sense.
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna Test Prep
http://www.sravna.com

Classroom Courses in Chennai
Online and Correspondence Courses

Expert Post
Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
User avatar
Status: Preparing for the another shot...!
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1425
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Followers: 128

Kudos [?]: 642 [0], given: 62

GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: Shoemaker Levi [#permalink] New post 22 Dec 2012, 02:49
Expert's post
Hii Sri.
I will really appreciate if you explain the choice E. I reduced the options to A and E but thereafter I was confused. Moreover since you said that in A first boldface is not something which he is explaining, I could have also said that in E the first boldface is not a judgement.
_________________

Prepositional Phrases Clarified|Elimination of BEING| Absolute Phrases Clarified
Rules For Posting
www.Univ-Scholarships.com

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 395
Location: India
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 192 [0], given: 10

Re: Shoemaker Levi [#permalink] New post 22 Dec 2012, 02:52
Marcab wrote:
Hii Sri.
I will really appreciate if you explain the choice E. I reduced the options to A and E but thereafter I was confused. Moreover since you said that in A first boldface is not something which he is explaining, I could have also said that in E the first boldface is not a judgement.


Dear Marcab,

It is only the belief of the astronomers that is offered as a support. So I think it is ok to consider it as a judgement.
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna Test Prep
http://www.sravna.com

Classroom Courses in Chennai
Online and Correspondence Courses

Current Student
avatar
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1097
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 273 [0], given: 67

Re: Shoemaker Levi [#permalink] New post 22 Dec 2012, 09:36
Marcab wrote:
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the
comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those
fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied
spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur
after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many
astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.

Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer,
it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's
outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that
explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that
conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second
provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a
consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

Source: Jamboree

OA
[Reveal] Spoiler:
soon


HI Sri

It will be really helpful if you can break the argument into conclusion and premise and than present your explanation.....Because I still think that Second is not a conclusion it is a part of Explanation to the issues raised in first bold face.
BUt Marcab really good one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Current Student
avatar
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1097
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 273 [0], given: 67

Re: Shoemaker Levi [#permalink] New post 22 Dec 2012, 09:50
Marcab wrote:
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the
comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those
fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied
spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur
after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many
astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.

Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer,
it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's
outer atmosphere without being burned up.
In the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that
explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that
conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second
provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a
consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

Source: Jamboree

OA
[Reveal] Spoiler:
soon


The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many
astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur<<<<<<<<<<<<<I think its a fact which is presented by the astronomer......to support the fact that the fragments crumbled to pieces by the effect of sulfur present in the atmosphere, and i dont think that breaking away of comets by the effect of sulfur is the conclusion of the argument its jsut a premise"

The second bole face is part of a sentence that begins with major Premise and not conclusion indicator ie Since Hence i do not think so it cannot be the conclusion. Moreover here the construction says Since X , Y and is a prediction i.e it is a claim and claim cannot be conclusion.

hence I stand by Option A!!!!!!!!!!!!
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 395
Location: India
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 192 [0], given: 10

Re: Shoemaker Levi [#permalink] New post 22 Dec 2012, 15:26
Archit143 wrote:
Marcab wrote:
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its collision course with Jupiter showed that the
comet broke into fragments before entering Jupiter's atmosphere in 1994, but they did not show how big those
fragments were. In hopes of gaining some indication of the fragments' size, astronomers studied
spectrographic analyses of Jupiter's outer atmosphere. These analyses revealed unprecedented traces of sulfur
after the fragments' entry. The fragments themselves almost certainly contained no sulfur, but many
astronomers believe that the cloud layer below Jupiter's outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.

Since sulfur would have seeped into the outer atmosphere if comet fragments had penetrated this cloud layer,
it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's
outer atmosphere without being burned up
the astronomer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first presents a circumstance for which the astronomer offers an explanation; the second is part of that
explanation.
B. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second is that
conclusion.
C. The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the conclusion of the argument; the second
provides evidence in support of that conclusion.
D. The first provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second acknowledges a
consideration that weighs against that conclusion.
E. The first is a judgment advanced in support of the conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

Source: Jamboree

OA
[Reveal] Spoiler:
soon


HI Sri

It will be really helpful if you can break the argument into conclusion and premise and than present your explanation.....Because I still think that Second is not a conclusion it is a part of Explanation to the issues raised in first bold face.
BUt Marcab really good one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Dear Archit143,

For clarity I am separating the premise into parts. The second part is part of the first boldface and we can see it helps in arriving at the conclusion.

Premise 1 of the argument: comet fragments penetrated the cloud layer, means sulfur would seep in to Jupiter's outer atmosphere from the cloud layer below. We find traces of sulfur in the outer atmosphere but for that we need sulfur to be present in the cloud layer.

Premise 2 of the argument: Many astronomers believe that the cloud layer below the outer atmosphere does contain sulfur.

The Conclusion of the argument: So, "it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's outer atmosphere without being burned up."

Kindly note that that the astronomers are interested in finding out the size of the fragments. So the second boldface is indeed the conclusion.

The argument does not explain why the cloud layer below the outer atmosphere contain sulfur. So choice A is wrong.
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna Test Prep
http://www.sravna.com

Classroom Courses in Chennai
Online and Correspondence Courses

Current Student
avatar
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1097
Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 273 [0], given: 67

Re: Shoemaker Levi [#permalink] New post 22 Dec 2012, 18:45
Below Explanation is from Manhattan's link....explanation is by Ron...........Really straight fwd explained why second is the conclusion......................

first of all, no explanation is offered for the statement that the fragments didn't contain sulfur. that's just stated as an observation - it's not explained at all.

what is explained is that the fragments DID have sulfur after penetrating jupiter's atmosphere. however, no explanation is provided for why the fragments were devoid of sulfur in the first place.

second, it appears that you've got the basic structure of a passage backward. you don't use the conclusion to justify other statements - you use other statements to justify the conclusion!
if statement X justifies statement Y, then statement Y (not statement X) is the conclusion out of those two.
Director
Director
User avatar
Status: My Thread Master Bschool Threads-->Krannert(Purdue),WP Carey(Arizona),Foster(Uwashngton)
Joined: 27 Jun 2011
Posts: 894
Followers: 62

Kudos [?]: 155 [0], given: 57

GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink] New post 01 Jan 2013, 11:19
OA is E

http://www.beatthegmat.com/mba/2011/02/ ... ce-problem

Explained throughly..
_________________

General GMAT useful links-->

Indian Bschools Accepting Gmat | My Gmat Daily Diary | All Gmat Practice CAT's | MBA Ranking 2013 | How to Convert Indian GPA/ Percentage to US 4 pt. GPA scale | GMAT MATH BOOK in downloadable PDF format| POWERSCORE CRITICAL REASONING BIBLE - FULL CHAPTER NOTES | Result correlation between GMAT and GMAT Club's Tests | Best GMAT Stories - Period!

More useful links-->

GMAT Prep Software Analysis and What If Scenarios| GMAT and MBA 101|Everything You Need to Prepare for the GMAT|New to the GMAT Club? <START HERE>|GMAT ToolKit: iPhone/iPod/iPad/Android application|

Verbal Treasure Hunt-->

"Ultimate" Study Plan for Verbal on the GMAT|Books to Read (Improve Verbal Score and Enjoy a Good Read)|Best Verbal GMAT Books 2012|Carcass Best EXTERNAL resources to tackle the GMAT Verbal Section|Ultimate GMAT Grammar Book from GC club [Free Download]|Ultimate Sentence Correction Encyclopedia|Souvik's The Most Comprehensive Collection Of Everything Official-SC|ALL SC Rules+Official Qs by Experts & Legendary Club Members|Meaning/Clarity SC Question Bank by Carcass_Souvik|Critical Reasoning Shortcuts and Tips|Critical Reasoning Megathread!|The Most Comprehensive Collection Of Everything Official- CR|GMAT Club's Reading Comprehension Strategy Guide|The Most Comprehensive Collection Of Everything Official- RC|Ultimate Reading Comprehension Encyclopedia|ALL RC Strategy+Official Q by Experts&Legendary Club Members

----
---
--
-


1 KUDOS = 1 THANK


Kick Ass Gmat

Intern
Intern
avatar
Status: Preparing...
Joined: 25 Mar 2013
Posts: 29
Location: United States
Sat: V
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
GMAT Date: 07-22-2013
GPA: 3.7
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 14

Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its [#permalink] New post 08 Jul 2013, 13:42
"but many astronomers believe ........-- this is clearly a judgement

"it is likely that some of the fragments were at least large enough to have passed through Jupiter's
outer atmosphere without being burned up" -- Clearly this is a conclusion based on the words used to express the intention.
hence E
Re: Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its   [#permalink] 08 Jul 2013, 13:42
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
3 When astronomers observed the comet Schwassman- Wachmann 3 mba1382 3 12 Jul 2014, 10:50
3 Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its ruturajp 9 20 Nov 2011, 20:07
2 Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its jamifahad 18 20 Jul 2011, 05:39
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its plaguerabbit 9 07 Jul 2007, 16:42
Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its freetheking 10 14 Jul 2006, 18:56
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Astronomer: Observations of the Shoemaker-Levi comet on its

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.